Russian Navy: Status & News #2

KiloGolf wrote:what's the status of the ex-Ukrainian LST that Russia took over? Did they induct them into BS fleet?

From what i have read somewhere all "captured" vessels are in docks, still in Russian hands, but not used or anything. Probably waiting for some kind of agreement with Ukraine.

At the time Russia returned about a 65% or the ships captured, but it was in order to avoid the war and it were the less combat capable ships. Still the most capable captured ships remain in the Russian hands, and I do not think that Russia would agree to return them to a country that proved to be hostile.

Between the 18 not returned ships, 7 are warships that can be in the Russian Navy still (by role, by project and by age). I do not expect agreements for the return of these 7 warships. Today only 2 of the current Ukranian ships would be of the level of these 8, and this being generous because the U206 Vinnitsa was returned by Russia after being captured. I think Russia will keep them in a reserve-like status until to be scrapped.

The other 11 ships, are not ships that would go to the Russian Navy, these ships would be material for the Russian Coast Guard at best (by role and by project). Even in this group I do not see a chance for an agreement for the return, but the only potential ships to return would be:

U802U662U926U240U544 ?

In my opinion the ships captured never will be returned.

Last edited by eehnie on Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:41 am; edited 1 time in total

Russia May Revive Its High Performance Cold War Alfa Class Sub With Modern Upgrades

Any further update on this news ?

Russia’s Alfa Class fast attack submarine was the SR-71 of the undersea world during the Cold War. The Alfas were largely constructed of titanium, used a liquid-metal cooled nuclear powerplant to obtain extreme speeds, and could reach depths far deeper than their competitors. Now Russia is floating the idea of building a modernized version of the design, one that leverages 40 years in technological advancement to take combat submarine automation to a whole new level.

Russian news outlet RT reports that there is an imitative to build a new series of Alfa Class boats that are totally revamped, especially in the area of automation.

RT quotes a Russian military industrial complex insider as saying this potential modernized version of the Alfa Class could see the very best of all Russian submarine technologies funneled into one high-end class.

The source also posits that a new version could start with a crew of 55 which may be able to be paired down to around 35 once the new systems are vetted. This is the same size as the original Alfa class complement, although the goal would be to make this size of crew work with much more ease than the original and highly finicky version.

Despite that, in many ways the Alfa Class (also known in Russia as the Project 705 Lyra Class) pushed materials science, nuclear powerplant technology and automation to their very limits. They could outrun torpedoes and rip through the depths at nearly 50 mph. Once they found an enemy submarine, their high maneuverability and speed meant that prey would have a hard time breaking free from a tailing Alfa.

The seven original boats, which were built between the mid 1970s and early 1980s and served into the 1990s, were highly automated for their day, carrying a crew of just 31 to 35 officers, and no enlisted crewman. In comparison, a Los Angeles Class fast attack sub carries four times that today.

Russian fast attack subs usually carry about a quarter to a third less crew than their U.S. counterparts. That’s nowhere near the size of the skeleton crews aboard the Alfa Class boats.

The ambitious automation schemes that the original Alfa Class boats were built around proved to be unreliable and the small crews had trouble keeping up with the needs of the boat while underway. This is where Russian designers now think they can make good on the original Alfa class concept today by infusing it with modern technologies.

The idea of bringing back such a legendary and mysterious class of Cold War-era submarines sure sounds enticing, but exactly how such a weapon system would fit into Russia’s undersea arsenal remains unclear.

Modern submarine technology is largely focused on being as undetectable as possible, and this especially means being as quiet as can be. The original Alfas were anything but quiet, at least when using speed to their advantage. They were so loud, they could be detected hundreds and even thousands of miles away by U.S. listening stations and submarines.

As such, Russia would have to have a new set of tactics in mind in order to give these surely expensive new underwater speed boats an upper hand over their ever more quiet potential rivals and even their stablemates within the Russian Navy. It is possible that way speed could overcome the need to stay silent during some parts of some missions, and it may be a way to undermine emerging submarine tracking technologies. But the moderate and slower speed sound signature of an updated Alfa Class design would have to compete with existing nuclear submarine designs in order to keep the type tactically relevant and flexible.

The remaining three for what moscow says will be in service around 2020 they will have the gas turbines by 2018 then they need to make sure they work, instill them on the ships finishing building the ships, sea trails etc.

Which is fine Russia doesn't NEED them its more of a nice thing to have.

Well i think that Russia do NEED them as there would not be enought ocean going ships in navy all of that time. Now it it clear that untin 2030-ies Russia will be in lack of big ships.

The Russian navy is a secondary thing they are at most concerned with shore based defense, their corvettes are capable of providing this. They do not need to a ton of large displacement ships right now. They aren't interested in trying to control the worlds oceans. They will get there, but right now they are more concerned with the army and airforce.

The remaining three for what moscow says will be in service around 2020 they will have the gas turbines by 2018 then they need to make sure they work, instill them on the ships finishing building the ships, sea trails etc.

Which is fine Russia doesn't NEED them its more of a nice thing to have.

Well i think that Russia do NEED them as there would not be enought ocean going ships in navy all of that time. Now it it clear that untin 2030-ies Russia will be in lack of big ships.

The Russian navy is a secondary thing they are at most concerned with shore based defense, their corvettes are capable of providing this. They do not need to a ton of large displacement ships right now. They aren't interested in trying to control the worlds oceans. They will get there, but right now they are more concerned with the army and airforce.

Of course they need a proper navy.

The reasons not having one have nothing to do with choosing coastal defense over anything else. Nobody is planning Incheon landing against Russia and nobody dares on challenging the territorial waters of Russia, anywhere in the world.

What they have right now in the Black Sea (a blocked, coastal defense-oriented, brown water surface fleet) is the reason why they are denied influence in half of the Black Sea and the entire Med by NATO. Whatever they deploy is chased or monitored by a huge amount of US or allied vessels, ASW air asset, anti-ship missile batteries and above all submarines. 3 modern frigates (or 6), 6-7 subs and 1 old heavy cruiser are not going to cut it.

The remaining three for what moscow says will be in service around 2020 they will have the gas turbines by 2018 then they need to make sure they work, instill them on the ships finishing building the ships, sea trails etc.

Which is fine Russia doesn't NEED them its more of a nice thing to have.

Well i think that Russia do NEED them as there would not be enought ocean going ships in navy all of that time. Now it it clear that untin 2030-ies Russia will be in lack of big ships.

The Russian navy is a secondary thing they are at most concerned with shore based defense, their corvettes are capable of providing this. They do not need to a ton of large displacement ships right now. They aren't interested in trying to control the worlds oceans. They will get there, but right now they are more concerned with the army and airforce.

They are concentrated to brown water navy not becouse they like that concept but becouse at this moment Russia is not capable to create strong navy. And without strong navy you can not be first class world power.

e.g. whole Syria intervention could be stoped by naval blocade from NATO, or even more Turkey alone have enought naval power to denie Russian naval traffic acces to Syria. And only thing that Russia could do is to start full scale war. But even then Russia wouldnt have acces to Turkey land.

Last edited by marat on Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:33 pm; edited 1 time in total

sepheronx wrote:Interesting. But I agree that it will take time. Funny though, they make large nuclear based propulsion for ships which would be ideal to make for larger ships like the proposed Liner. And they were able to get a ship out in relatively quick time too (latest ice breaker).

If I'm not mistaken, the Arktika won't be completed until 2018 - it has a ways to go yet.

The remaining three for what moscow says will be in service around 2020 they will have the gas turbines by 2018 then they need to make sure they work, instill them on the ships finishing building the ships, sea trails etc.

Which is fine Russia doesn't NEED them its more of a nice thing to have.

Well i think that Russia do NEED them as there would not be enought ocean going ships in navy all of that time. Now it it clear that untin 2030-ies Russia will be in lack of big ships.

The Russian navy is a secondary thing they are at most concerned with shore based defense, their corvettes are capable of providing this. They do not need to a ton of large displacement ships right now. They aren't interested in trying to control the worlds oceans. They will get there, but right now they are more concerned with the army and airforce.

They are concentrated to brown water navy not becouse they like that concept but becouse at this moment Russia is not capable to create strong navy. And without strong navy you can not be first class world power.

e.g. whole Syria intervention could be stoped by naval blocade from NATO, or even more Turkey alone have enought naval power to denie Russian naval traffic acces to Syria. And only thing that Russia could do is to start full scale war. But even then Russia wouldnt have acces to Turkey land.

Eh syria could be stopped if Nato stops supporting the terrorists you think Nato will blockade their dogs lawls.

turkish navy would get crushed vs the Russian navy period. Now against the US no way Russia would win that sea battle, They do not need the ships right now. so they are not in a hurry to build themalso a sea blockade would do nothing for syria. All the illegal smuggling is land lock via Turkery and such.

I do agree that right now Russia cannot build her ships quick enough and they really do need to improve there. Because its kinda sad in a way.

sepheronx wrote:Interesting. But I agree that it will take time. Funny though, they make large nuclear based propulsion for ships which would be ideal to make for larger ships like the proposed Liner. And they were able to get a ship out in relatively quick time too (latest ice breaker).

If I'm not mistaken, the Arktika won't be completed until 2018 - it has a ways to go yet.

sepheronx wrote:Interesting. But I agree that it will take time. Funny though, they make large nuclear based propulsion for ships which would be ideal to make for larger ships like the proposed Liner. And they were able to get a ship out in relatively quick time too (latest ice breaker).

If I'm not mistaken, the Arktika won't be completed until 2018 - it has a ways to go yet.

Maybe but only if Russia concentrated force from several fleets.That didn't work out too well last time they tried it...

When was that exactly? Are we talking about in a relevant time period, with comparable modern technology, with comparable modern tactics? I'm sure WW1 had it's fair share of digital electronics, AESA radars, anti-ship missiles, CIWS, supersonic torpedos, underwater drones, diesel-electric attack subs.....oh and I forgot, tactical nuclear warheads...

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Eh syria could be stopped if Nato stops supporting the terrorists you think Nato will blockade their dogs lawls.

turkish navy would get crushed vs the Russian navy period. Now against the US no way Russia would win that sea battle, They do not need the ships right now. so they are not in a hurry to build themalso a sea blockade would do nothing for syria. All the illegal smuggling is land lock via Turkery and such.

I do agree that right now Russia cannot build her ships quick enough and they really do need to improve there. Because its kinda sad in a way.

I was writing about blocade of Russian naval traffic to Syria so i do not see why you are menion NATO support of their local alies?

You can put as much "period" as you like but that would not change the fact that at this moment Turkish fleet is much stronger then BSF and Detachment in Mediteran Sea. And we are talking about potential conflict near Syrian coast which is fully in range od Turkish AF as well. So BSF would be blocked in Black Sea and ships that are currently in Mediteranean Sea would have wait for weeks for any reinforcement from other fleets.

At this moment Russia have just 2 modern ships they could sendt to fight, Gorshkov nad Grigorevich one of them is blocked in BS and another is 2-3 weeks far away (including preparation time). 2 Neustrashivi Frigates and even 4 stereguschy corvettes can also be sent. But that is just 7-8 not obsolet ships out of which 4 are corvettes.

So fleet would depend on 30+ years old cold war designed destroyers (Udaloy as ASW ships and Sovremeny), cruisers and 1 problematic carrier. Ofcourse submarine forces of Russia are quite stronge but Turkish navy also have strong d/e submarine forces and quite stronge asw forces as well.

Russia would neek weeks or more realistic months to join forces as their ships are disperse around the globe and all 3 remaining fleets (CSF would hardly take part of task force so just some missile attack on ground targets could be their job) would be needed to send all of their battle ready ships in order to have one strong fleet that could enter Syria coasts again.

On opposite side Turkey have 8 quite modern frigates and 8 more of cold war design , 2-3 modern corvettes several old corvettes and more then 10-15 FAC 9 of which are quite new and potent . All of them they could join very fast in task forces as they wish.

This is not battle that Russia would accept to fight and Syria in that case would be left to air supply only. That would significantly limited Russian and Assad forces actions.

Russia do need strong fleet and Grigorovich ships are together with 3 more Gorshkovs all that they could finish in next 3-5 years So Russia need those 3 Grigorovich very much.

Just to remind you , all of this discussion started after you claimed that Russia do not need 3 more Grigorovich class frigates.

When was that exactly? Are we talking about in a relevant time period, with comparable modern technology, with comparable modern tactics?

Tsushima.Russia is basically now in a position like post Russo-Japanese war where they have the dated & weak in number remnants of a big fleet & just started building a few nice new smallish ships like Novik.There is potential strength in future but not that much now.

On opposite side Turkey have 8 quite modern frigates and 8 more of cold war design , 2-3 modern corvettes several old corvettes and more then 10-15 FAC 9 of which are quite new and potent .

The black sea is a gold fish bowl... any enemy ships will last only hours not days.

I am sure the Russians will enjoy testing their new anti ship and anti sub weapons on the turkish navy.

Regarding the contingent of Russian forces in Syria... can any turkish aircraft get near the S-400 battery there?

I would think air power would be pretty decisive with Flankers and Foxhounds clearing the skies, with cruise missiles taking out ships in port and airfields fairly rapidly... even without using nukes.

NATO is about defence not suicide... if turkey provokes an attack by Russia I rather doubt there would be a queue to help... especially when cruise missiles start hitting targets...

_________________“The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

S 400 or S 300 are not wonderweapons and one batery cannot win the war.

One battery can cause serious damage to any Turkish attack and inflict upon them more crashed aircraft than they are likely to want to accept.

Turkey can call any blockade they like, but when push comes to shove and the Russian Navy tests their resolve I rather doubt it would hold very long, if at all.

Turkey have no right to blockade anything and doing so would be an act of war. Syria is not really in a great position to retaliate but Russia could easily do that for them if requested... a few anti ship batteries could deal with the turkish ships enforcing the blockade... land based Yakhont or Kh-35 would get a test...

_________________“The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

GarryB wrote:The black sea is a gold fish bowl... any enemy ships will last only hours not days.

I am sure the Russians will enjoy testing their new anti ship and anti sub weapons on the turkish navy.

Regarding the contingent of Russian forces in Syria... can any turkish aircraft get near the S-400 battery there?

I would think air power would be pretty decisive with Flankers and Foxhounds clearing the skies, with cruise missiles taking out ships in port and airfields fairly rapidly... even without using nukes.

NATO is about defence not suicide... if turkey provokes an attack by Russia I rather doubt there would be a queue to help... especially when cruise missiles start hitting targets...

Right and i am sure that Turkish Navy would simple leve Black Sea and concentrate on mediteranean sea. S 400 or S 300 are not wonderweapons and one batery cannot win the war.

And i must remind on my words, IF Turkey declar naval blockade of Syrian coast all that Russia could do is to start full sixe war with Turkey, in that war Russia would win i am sure in that.

Not sure what this discussion has to do with this thread but it seems a weird an ill thought out supposition to start with.

Attempting the blockading civilian ships is one thing, difficult but possible due as much as anything to insurance issues. But blockading the navy of a power like Russia, will just not happen as any attempt to stop free passage will result in a declaration of war.

Discussing what assets which country has in the area is a pointless and irrelevant exercise.

Can't you delete this lot Garry? It has no relevance to the thread topic.

GarryB wrote:The black sea is a gold fish bowl... any enemy ships will last only hours not days.

I am sure the Russians will enjoy testing their new anti ship and anti sub weapons on the turkish navy.

Regarding the contingent of Russian forces in Syria... can any turkish aircraft get near the S-400 battery there?

I would think air power would be pretty decisive with Flankers and Foxhounds clearing the skies, with cruise missiles taking out ships in port and airfields fairly rapidly... even without using nukes.

NATO is about defence not suicide... if turkey provokes an attack by Russia I rather doubt there would be a queue to help... especially when cruise missiles start hitting targets...

Turkey is in possession of both movable shore-based Harpoon launchers as well as air-launched SLAM-ERs. I doubt they would care to deploy serious surface vessels in what basically is a big lake. One that they essentially control and can block when they fancy. Russian surface assets will have a hard time operating close to 200 km from Turkish shores, an area that most certainly will be full of Turkish submarines.

As an example Vipers taking off from their major base in Merzifon (2 Viper Sqdns) can comfortable take off, keep flying over Turkey and release SLAM-ERs over Kastamonu and hit targets 200 km away towards Sevastopol (with max. operational range of 270 km.).

Russian Navy at the end of the year, is expected to take into service a new deep-water torpedo "Case", now it passes the state test.

http://vpk-news.ru/news/31162

This was announced on Wednesday Tass source in the Russian military-industrial complex.

As explained by the agency, "Case" is a modernized version of the recently adopted adopted homing torpedo "Physicist".

"Now a new version of the torpedo pass state tests at Lake Issyk-Kul in Kyrgyzstan. They are scheduled for completion at the end of the year. In case of success, the torpedo will be adopted, and in 2017 to begin mass production of naval weapons ", - said the source.

According to him, the new torpedo will like its predecessor, the heat, however, and can be controlled from a submarine.

"Also," Hard "will receive an improved homing system with extended range capture underwater targets. Firing range, speed, and maximum depth of fire on board the submarine will remain the same - 50 kilometers, more than 50 knots, 400 meters respectively, "- he told the agency.

He noted that the "pouch" will be armed first nuclear submarine of project 955 (A) "Northwind" and 885 (M) "Ash". With the start of series production "Cases" release "Physics" stop.

Torpedoes are designed at the St. Petersburg Research Institute of Marine Engineering, and their production will plant "Dagdizel".